[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: [dinosaur] RETRACTION: Oculudentavis, new smallest known Mesozoic bird in amber from Cretaceous of Myanmar

Mike Taylor <sauropoda@gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't have a *problem* with it â it's obviously not inappropriate. I just 
> think it's desperately unimaginative. A missed opportunity.

Alas, "desperately unimaginative" seems to be par for the course in
taxonomy.  For example, I'm gobsmacked that the folks who named
_Sinusonasus_ couldn't dig a little deeper and come up with a more
inventive name, based on a fairly decent troodontid specimen.  (I
don't mean to pick on _Sinusonasus_... for some reason this clunky
moniker sprang to mind.)


Mickey Mortimer <mickey_mortimer111@msn.com> wrote:

> While I couldn't care less about proper Latin or Greek formulation in names,

It pains me to read that, Mickey.  Personally, I wince whenever I see
a badly formed name - including _Oculudentavis_.  Based on the
comments by other DML contributors, I'm heartened that I'm not the
only one who thinks this way.  Where's the harm in authors trying just
a bit harder to get their names right?